Yeah, “fair” is a word we talk about. We talk about “fair” when we talk about “even.” I feel as though “even” can sometimes lead to false equivalents, whereas “fair” is, is this how you’d like to be treated if somebody disagreed with you?

We all have bias, we all have a point of view. I think the best you can do is try to be aware of it and try to make sure that the bias doesn’t make you treat someone else unfairly.

=====================

Ok.

Today, in this world & in this environment, I could be having a discussion on some topic and make a statement and 99% of the time the other person will say <usually indignantly> “where did you hear that?” … and I could say “well, Albert Einstein said it” … and I can almost guarantee I will get the following question … “when did he say that?” … and if I said “well, he said it on <pick your poison … FoxNews, MSNBC, CNN, NYTimes, Washington Post, etc>” … I can almost guarantee I will get a ‘lean-back-in-chair-moment combined with a sage “oh, he is biased.”

Yeah.

Albert Einstein.

Biased because he decided to say something smart but, unfortunately, on … well … some venue.

Suffice it to say that, lately, it seems like anyone you disagree with or anyone who espouses a different view than you is “biased.”

This is crazy.

And it gets crazier because the same people who are quick to brand some mainstream news venue as biased are the same ones to place blind faith on some random internet website espousing something they agree with.

Let’s be clear.

Professional journalists may slant their work toward their own views but non professionals, and opinion people, are biased.

The vast majority of websites and blogs out there are, for all intents and purposes, biased.

Placing those important nuances aside … everyone should assume a fact is a fact and a fact can be delivered in a variety of ways – slanted, biased, fair, straightforward, misused – but it still remains a fact.

Bias:

Prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair.

Most people would suggest that any site that only focuses on one side of an issue without giving the same amount of “unbiased” coverage to the other side is biased.

Fox News. Biased.

MSNBC. Biased.

The Nation. Biased.

Federalist. Biased.

Pravda. Biased.

Yep. All of them.

Biased.

I, personally, do not call them biased <at least their news programming/pieces … not their opinion programming/pieces>.

I would call them intellectually slanted toward a specific view but still factual & truthful journalism. For the most part, if it is not an opinion show, you will receive some facts to sift through.

Yeah.

Some of the stories they publish are great, helpful, and insightful.

Yeah.

Some of them are extremely one-sided.

And while this one-sidedness may be well intended all it really does is drive us into deeper separation and make the ‘bias gap’ seem deep & wide.

Here is where the real trouble begins.

If everything is biased … who offers the truth?

Who you view as biased I view as a purveyor of truth … well … where is there any place for truth between us?

We cannot afford to be in an information gathering world where we “take what resonates and leave the rest.” We cannot because what resonates isn’t always what is reality or truthful. It is actually more likely to simply fit your belief system.

Uh oh.

If it fits than what doesn’t fit is biased.

Once again.

This is crazy.

I tend to believe this is a reflection of a number of things all grounded in the inability to know who to trust <because if I accepted an expert as an expert then I would be able to accept an expert speaking truth I could believe as unbiased>. I tend to believe there is a strong strain of “anti-intellectualism” or maybe it is better called “a gut instinct opinion world” in which facts only confuse the issue <therefore shouldn’t be pursued> and rational thinking is actually ‘common sense.’

Sigh.

We live in a wacky world in which we have no experts, we trust no institutions to not have some nefarious intent and truth is in the eyes of the beholder.

We live in a wacky world in which articles by professional journalists, which are fact-based, are confused with op-eds <opinion & editorials> which is … uhm … an opinion, a column, meaning it does not have to be unbiased, fair, or balanced.

We live in a wacky world in which the internet is like the wild west of information. There are minimal laws, minimal enforcers of laws and a shitload of people who are willing to have a dubious relationship with any law <and truth or proper use of facts>.

We live in a wacky world in which people have more access to an almost unlimited unfettered amount of information and they also have the freedom to contribute to that unfettered amount of information as they see fit.

We live in a wacky world where even the people who are allegedly so concerned with finding the truth circulate a shitload of bullshit.

Yeah.

It is a wacky world.

That being said, it is not wacky enough to simply discard good smart thoughtful factual information <some would call that “Truth”> under some wacky filter we apply to every mouthpiece which makes that mouthpiece conveniently “biased” so we have an excuse to disregard the information.

I believe we can find fair, even and biased wherever we may choose to look. I can find it on FoxNews, CNN, MSNBC, BBC and almost every venue with professional journalism employees. It doesn’t mean they will not slant the information. It doesn’t mean they may conveniently leave a fact or two out.

But in this wacky world I cannot afford to discard everything and I, frankly, have no desire to just discard what doesn’t meet my current views.

I believe that each of us needs to take responsibility for detaching ourselves from what we want to be true, and get off our lazy asses to find out what actually is true … and stop using “biased” as a reason to not consider what was shared.

I will end where I began:

We all have bias, we all have a point of view. I think the best you can do is try to be aware of it and try to make sure that the bias doesn’t make you treat someone else unfairly.

“Fake news fabricated as truth that panders to its audience’s ideologies and promises an illusion of the future – enough to compel people to join an imagined cause.”

—

TrendMicro

================

“Advertising is fundamentally persuasion and persuasion happens to be not a science, but an art.”

—

Bill Bernbach

============

“As an advertiser we must assume responsibility for everything we do, because everything we do has the potential to make someone think something or do something.

And that ‘something’ can be good or bad. It is up to us to steer it toward good.”

—-

Bruce McTague

===================

Ok.

If I hear one more politician or troll commenter online say “not one vote was affected by Russian efforts during the Presidential campaign” I am gonna tear my hair out.

While I have talked about ‘fake news’ and the responsibility media has in reporting, I have avoided talking about how Russia influenced the Presidential campaign because it sounds political and politicians have made simplistic soundbites the discussion point by saying shit like “can anyone point to any evidence that one vote was changed”.

Well.

Today I am going to point … and I am not a politician and now I have a report to point to <which I will highlight in a couple of moments>.

Suffice it to say since the election of Donald J Trump and following the widespread debate about how fake news on social media may have contributed to his victory I have racked my brain on how to point out to people how, if done effectively, a Russian media campaign <fake news initiative> could have certainly impacted behavior at the election booth.

I wanted to do so not because I know for sure that votes were affected but rather because by not even considering, or acknowledging, that people may have been affected enough to influence their vote means we diminish the potential impact of a real propaganda campaign.

While non advertising people most often speak of “advertising creates awareness” <at best> or “I am not impacted by advertising” <at worst> … they are wrong.

The truth <inside the hallways of advertising agencies around the world> is that we speak of influencing real behavior – change brand preferences, convince someone to try, affect attitudes toward a particular brand or product <your own or a competitor>, shift preferences from one brand or product to another and even educate to create an impact in terms of behavior.

Advertising and professional communications is business … the business of persuading people to think things and do things. It may be immediate actions or it may be the process of engaging to ultimately affect actions … but I cannot think of one business spending one dollar on professional communications who does not desire to persuade people to think at least one thing with the intent to create at least one type of behavior.

I have sat through hundreds of meetings analyzing shifts in attitudes & behavior <linked to sales of my business as well as shifts in competitors business> scouring information with regard to perceptions, persuasion, purchase intent, impact of influencers, etc.

I have sat through thousands of hours of discussion on ideas, impressions and attitudes about a brand or product all with the intent to find something that will predispose someone to see it in some positive light in which it will compel someone to buy it versus something else.

I say all of this because it is absolutely nuts to suggest an effective propaganda or fake news <or let’s call it what it really was … an advertising campaign driven by social media> cannot affect people’s behaviors & attitudes.

They call it “forward thinking threat research” … I would have suggested they could have contacted any global advertising agency who could have shown them study after study with regard to how advertising can affect behavior & change attitudes.

That said.

The report does do what I have been unable to unearth in all my files of Attitude & Usage studies and communications research … they show specific tactics and plans and costs and results. They show you what a communication plan, done effectively, can do.

And, suffice it to say, it doesn’t take a shitload of money to effectively propagate lies, false narratives and fake news.

They provide an analysis focusing on fake news and alternative storylines and the use of influencers <influencers & influencer campaigns: is what every Public Relations agency in the world does for their clients every single day> as well as the overall effect in manipulating social behavior.

Their report is actually quite similar to what we in the advertising & communications business look at every week … except we do so in much more detail picking apart the minutiae in order to see what button we can push to … well … push someone a little closer to doing what we would like them to do.

With regard to the Presidential campaign, I want to be clear, what effective propaganda can do:

It can make someone seem smarter

It can make someone seem worse than they are

If those are two separate someones, you have created a distinction gap between the someones. I could argue that the Russians did exactly that … made an ‘incompetent someone’ edge a little closer to appearing competent and made a ‘flawed someone’ edge a little closer to being worse than flawed.

Uhm.

That can make a difference when market share equals millions of dollars or thousands of votes, not millions, equals a presidency.

Anyway.

Some people will never be convinced that a propaganda effort, or an advertising campaign, can actually affect how they think and what they do.

That is too bad.

They would be wrong … but purposefully ignorant type wrong.

But I do believe everyone would agree that discerning truth from fiction is more difficult today than it has ever been and I tend to believe everyone doesn’t like that. Which means it is increasingly important that people not only think a little more about what they are absorbing information wise but maybe we need to become better at helping people question what they see.

This is where leaders & influencers really do matter.

They need to stop undermining good sources of truth simply because that source may not support some narrative they want. Politifacts and maybe Snopes and a variety of other locations do a really nice job of sifting through fact versus fiction in a mostly unbiased way. And, yet, enough people diminish their value when it don’t match their narrative that they remain slotted as a viable source for some people and not a viable source for others. We need to find some universally accepted locations of truth.

Sure.

Some people will not be happy about what they see but the real enemy is fake news and created fictional narrative and not half-truths or misused facts.

But all people should be happy with truth … and not being fooled by fake news and cyber propaganda.

The Russians did affect the 2016 election. I cannot tell you how much or if it represented a different result than would have happened if they had not been involved <although my gut professional instincts suggest they shifted the dial enough to make a difference>. I will tell anyone reading this if you gave MillwardBrown (or any viable advertising agency which has some programmatic planning) maybe $50k and all the county data & all the media information they could clearly, and unequivocally, show vote results in counties with Russia-driven messaging versus non-Russian messaging counties. Shit. That’s what they do in any media review meeting.

But, at this point, we shouldn’t debate the result we should be discussing how efforts like this, when done effectively, can impact our view on things, ideas and people. Because if we can all admit that, well, we are halfway to getting closer toward real truth.

The report from Trend Micro, a cybersecurity firm, is 81 pages long but if you have the time … worth every second to read.

The Fake News Machine research paper comes at a time of increasing concern across the globe about the hacking of elections and the ways that fake news on social media has manipulated voters. The report delves into the underground marketplaces that can allow campaigns, political parties, private companies and other entities to strategically create and distribute fake content to shift public perceptions.

Instead of teaching someone else to do a job, we like to do it ourselves. And this trait has been carried over into our foreign policy.”

–

Nixon from his Silent Majority speech

==============

So.

It is a little difficult to unpack everything happening with regard to “America First” and what it means for America short term and long term.

I have a lot to suggest on this topic but because there is so much let me offer some overarching ways of viewing it all. I would also like to note that I am purposefully using Trump as a reference point and not Republican or Trump administration because I believe we would be incredibly shortsighted to not believe that his personal views on how the world exists <in his mind> do drive his behavior and the decisions being made:

How Trump views the leadership concept of dragging up versus dragging down

How Trump views rules & regulations

How Trump views I versus team

How Trump views uncertainty

How Trump views life only through a dollars & cents lens <driving an economics first, and only, view>

All of these views drive America First … all of which <I would suggest> actually encourage an America Alone strategy. In addition … to a larger extent … all actually encourage an “every man for himself” attitude <kind of an extremely perverse version of traditional conservative ideology>.

Dragging up versus dragging down

As of this writing I have no clue whether America will stay in the Paris Climate agreement but I will use it as an example of how Trump views America leadership and leadership in general <because it applies to almost everything he is doing>.

Leaders understand that to lead you need to ‘drag up’ behavior. This comes at an expense in that you are demanded to do more things and act a little ‘better’ without any real compensation.

Yes. This makes Life harder for the leader and mostly offers no additional compensation for the extra effort. You do it because it … well … leads behaviors and attitudes.

For example, part of the Paris agreement was that United State had higher standards. This certainly places a burden on American companies. It also translates into an innovation push to meet those standards. And, ultimately, because we lead in innovation the rest of the world will eventually buy our innovations. This leadership also encourages other countries to ‘play up’ as close to United States as possible. Our ‘compensation’ for our better behavior may not be apparent short term but bears the fruits long term <and it is what leaders do>

Conversely, if United States drops out, the overall leadership standard drops and, as any organizational study will tell you, the overall tide of standards will sink lower as things get dragged downwards.

This is, simplistically, why leaders have higher standards in business. It drags the organization up … and not down.

Trump does not understand this. Nor does he believe in this. I feel comfortable saying this because if he doesn’t understand how his current behavior drags down … well … everything it is indicative he doesn’t understand dragging up.

Rules & regulations

I took a big gulp as I found a list of regulations the Trump administration has eliminated while we were watching the general incompetence <by the way … I am not suggesting eliminating things is any less incompetent because even on that Trump seems to follow an “if it exists it should not exist” strategy and not “a thoughtful consideration of its impact” type decision> of Trump leadership.

Think of it is this way. Trump believes if there had been no rules & regulations he would be the wealthiest man in the world. He has never found a rule or regulation he has ever liked. He also believes that if he thinks that everyone should think that. I have written about capitalism a zillion times and I have argued that unfettered capitalism simply brings out the worst in people and increases inequality. Rules & regulations, done well, tend to herd behavior <and everyone makes money>.

Trump doesn’t think rules apply to him so why wouldn’t we expect him to eliminate rules so he doesn’t even have to pretend he plays by the rules.

I versus team

Trump has never been part of a team nor does he have any desire to be a team leader. How this translates into his decision attitude is that the global interconnectedness is irrelevant to him. No. He actually thinks it is a negative.

We are not a global team seeking to win but rather it is ‘every man for himself.’ Unfortunately this attitude also cascades down into domestic policy.

And because I used the Paris Climate deal earlier to make a point on something else I will do so again here. One would think it would be remarkable that someone who has not appointed someone to run the White House Office of Science and Technology <a person who traditionally serves as the President’s chief science officer> or has the majority of posts on the President’s Council of Advisers on Science and Technology <a group of civilian science and tech leaders who advise the president> unfilled would feel qualified to make this Paris decision. However, if you do not value a team effort and believe “I” is all that matters then the qualified support doesn’t really matter and, in fact, could negatively affect “the I.”

That is what he is doing with … well … everything. “I” is all that matters … ‘fuck that team thing.’

All that said. Everything Trump does and supports gives the finger to anything that could be construed as a team effort. It is “I” in the world. “I” as a country. “I” as a business and … well … “I alone” is the mantra.

That said, “it has always been about me and just me” bleeds into everything Trump believes and does.

Uncertainty

Suffice it to say Trump views uncertainty as a positive <with regard to everything> therefore he is willing to commit to no long term plans or vision and , at the same time, spin the wheel of the ship to wrench it in some direction yet to be identified. It also seems to me that wrenching the entire system 180degrees creates what I offered up as the biggest flaw in Trump’s way of doing business — uncertainty.

He does this because he thrives on the belief America will ultimately benefit from uncertainty. He believes that America will swoop in now that is it is free from the shackles of the ‘old order’ <way of doing things, deals, regulations, etc> and dominate what … well … we already dominated.

The country that has spent decades constructing an international construct based on free trade, multilateral cooperation, a global alliance network, and the promotion of democratic values has now chosen as its leader a man who detests any structure supporting any & all of those things. He wants a demolition derby hoping his car is the winner.

This is a bad idea. Very bad. And, once again, while I am disappointed in Trump I am even more disappointed a business man <the secretary of state> thinks this way because it ignores business 101. Well. It ignores business 101 depending on whether you think America is special, exceptional in some way or that part of what makes America distinct in the world is not the bigness of our economy but rather the bigness of our idea.

That said, Trump doesn’t believe in big ideas he only believes in big money. Oh. If you have no ideas the only way to make money is to take advantage of uncertainty. The problem is that America is built on an idea & ideals and not money and while we may <if we are really lucky> benefit economically we will do so at the sacrifice of our ideas, ideals and leadership in this uncertain world Trump desires to play his dangerous game in.

Leaders don’t act with uncertainty as their compass they use certainty to lead. Of course, Trump wouldn’t know how to lead even if given an instruction manual with lots of pictures.

The dollars & cents lens <economics first>

I am not a diplomat or some foreign policy expert but I admit that I took a big gulp the other day when I saw secretary of state suggest that America should make economic and security needs above American ‘values.’ It seems to be that everything will be decided on an exchange of money and not on an exchange of ideas <where value is a combination of economics and values>. Yes. This means that everything and everyone will be viewed through a dollars & cents lens — if you have money, let’s talk.

US foreign policy, Tillerson said, is guided by fundamental values, but he cautioned: “If we condition too heavily that others must adopt this value that we’ve come to over a long history of our own, it really creates obstacles to our ability to advance our national security interests, our economic interests.”

Well.

This seems horribly misguided.

It seems to me while USA is in the ‘doing & making & selling shit” business we are also in the “doing & making & selling shit with values” business.

It seems to me that USA should not really be in the “partnerships of convenience” business where we can conveniently set aside our values & ideals but rather we are in the “partnership with ideals” business where we are delighted to do business with you but you are gonna have to accept the fact we are gonna showcase freedom, democracy and what we believe people deserve.

Let’s be clear … our values don’t get in the way of our economic interests. To believe that is to not believe in ‘value’ <in which premium price relies on some value equation above a dollar is a dollar>.

Anyway. Dollars & cents seems quite short sighted. As Gen. George Marshall, Army Chief of Staff, commented in 1945, Washington could no longer pursue a narrow conception of national interest or limit its strategic horizons to the Western Hemisphere: “We are now concerned with the peace of the entire world.”

To me, the pursuit of “America First” can often be accomplished best by protecting and defending the rights of others which actually includes economic relationships.

On that note I dug up a speech made on December 20, 1951 by Dean Acheson which laid out a view of American foreign policy very different from Tillerson’s:

——————–

The greatest asset we have in all the world—even greater than our material power—is the American idea. No one needs to tell an American audience all the things that this holds for us. It is so much a part of our everyday lives that we do not stop to define it, or to put it into packages for export. But throughout the world, wherever people are oppressed, wherever people dream of freedom and opportunity, they feel the inspiration of the American idea.

What we are trying to do, in our foreign policy, is to make possible a world in which our own people, and all people who have the same determination, can work in their own way toward a better life, without having to bear the yoke of tyranny.

—————-

Look.

I have always known the Trump administration would be putting economy, money, above all and I did outline some concerns I had about attacking a foreign policy based on transactional relationships in some past pieces … but it now has become a reality … it is commerce over conscience.

=================

“Life doesn’t get easier or more forgiving, we get stronger and more resilient.

—

Steve Maraboli,

=================

I think this is a little crazy to think this way as a country. Money is the currency of survival in today’s world and offers an ongoing temptation for “well, just a little bit more would be nice.”

I would be naive to not understand that while 90% of us know money isn’t everything … that same 90% knows money is something. I mentioned it that way because it becomes easy to think money as a ‘this or that’ thought, everything or nothing, and, yet, in this case it is not everything but is certainly still something.

That said … Money is 100% everything to Trump and I think Trump yielding the high ground to simply gain some perceived temporary ‘economic advantage’ is simply wrong and will come back to haunt us.

To be clear … Trump wouldn’t recognize the high ground if it smacked him in the face.

In the end.

Whew.

“The U.S. is, for now, out of the world order business.” <Robert Kagan>.

After more than 70 years, American internationalism was pronounced politically dead.

What is really stunning, and upsetting, to people like me is that now the United States is going backwards. It is simply beyond me that we are steering ourselves toward antiquated systems and antiquated thinking rather than moving forward to leading in innovations and ideas. I can only feel a sinking feeling in my stomach as the rest of the world understands what Trump, and his administration, apparently does not … that the United States is about to give away the markets, the technology, the innovation, the jobs and … the leadership. The unifying thread through Trump’s agenda appears to be an attempt to resurrect an earlier antiquated world which marginalizes future considerations and maximizes short term considerations culminating in a stunningly self-destructive United States act of diplomatic and economic isolation.

We have faced other crisis in our history and have become stronger by rejecting the easy way out and taking the right way in meeting our challenges. Our greatness as a nation has been our capacity to do what had to be done when we knew our direction and path was right.

There is a price to pay if America concludes we are now indifferent to freedoms globally as well as global issues and sit on the sidelines willing to watch it diminished under the guise of “we will not lecture or suggest we know better than you” <which, frankly, is about as un-American as you can get because we DO know better — freedom of thought, religion, speech, etc is better & good> in combination with suggesting “but we will talk with you of you have some money to give us.”

I would note that Pew surveys show United States becoming less and less popular and while popularity is not the best measuring stick I could suggest <in looking at the information> that the decline is a reflection of our growing indifference to democratic values and increasing interest in economic values.

The world see United States under Donald J Trump assuming a transactional based relationship with the world and not a democratic based relationship with the world.

Sigh.

There is a price to pay for such positions.

Here is what I believe.

Trump’s attempt to reverse the shift toward the future is not sustainable. Going backwards never is. And while his quasi-insane onslaught against any rule & regulation under his belief that rules & regulations were the only thing that kept him from being the wealthiest man in the world he is actually going to be a horrible temporary “aberration” in the world’s long march toward the future.

I also believe this aberration will come at a terrible cost to America. We may become first but first to the bottom looking up at those who chose to lead the way forward not lead the way backwards.

Trump is a profoundly mediocre man with a profoundly dangerous idea of how to make America First.

I personally don’t believe Trump has ever known what America First meant … it was simply a slogan to him. It would behoove him to think about this: If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great <Alexis de Tocqueville>. An Economics First strategy sacrifices “the good” which inevitably means America will cease to be great.

“People don’t realize, you know, the Civil War, if you think about it, why?”

“People don’t ask that question, but why was there the Civil War?

Why could that one not have been worked out?”

—

President Trump said during Washington Examiner interview today

======================================

In 2013 bibliographers estimated that more than 65,000 books have been written about the Civil War.

Sigh.

It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion.

======= GETTYSBURG ADDRESS: Abraham Lincoln =======

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate — we can not consecrate — we can not hallow — this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Today we begin day 101 of the Trump administration. And while I truly wanted

………. Trump administration …….

to suggest that the administration had evolved from clown car status to even possibly a Hyundai status < or at least to a Lada> the leader of the administration, the driver president as it were, seems to want to continue being … well … a profoundly mediocre person.

Sad.

Sad not in that mediocrity is a bad thing but rather he continues to not see mediocrity whenever he looks in the mirror.

Mediocre? The two opening quotes came directly from his most recent interview … this one with Reuters <whose reporter I would give a raise to simply for not laughing out loud at times>.

They seem to sum up everything that makes me think Trump is just a profoundly mediocre person <and, unfortunately, my president>.

Frankly, I need to stop reading interviews he gives. Every time I do I <a> laugh out loud, <b> shake my head , <c> am mortified that someone like this is actually leading a country let alone talking with other incredibly qualified people leading their countries and <d> get angry. He always sounds like be believes he is the most interesting man in the world writing his own lines for the “Most Interesting Man In The World” advertising campaign.

<note: the Dos Equis most interesting man in the world was actually an interesting man>

Sad.

I will respectfully disagree with one of Trump’s most ardent followers who suggested yesterday that “that’s how a CEO makes decisions” because the typical CEO does not make decisions like this, does not use words like this nor do they behave like this.

All that said.

Another long interview and, once again, we gain some insight into the small brain of the “big handed” Donald J. Trump. He is foolishly naïve … often stunningly ignorant … a profoundly mediocre person.

What did he think the Presidency was?

Who thinks that being President is easy?

Who thinks it’s not a lot of work?

How could he be so blind sided … I mean … geez … all you have to do to see the difficulty and complexity of the job, and how that mental burden physically affects a President, is to look at before and after pictures of literally every President <who wasn’t wearing a wig>.

Even in this interview … one 99 days in <so he has had some experience to incorporate into his attitude & behavior> he still sounded like the guy at the end of the bar after having had one too many beers … talking about how he could be as good as any CEO in the world. From the corner of the bar everything looks easier … those of us who have seen the corner office knows it just ain’t that easy.

It’s a real job which has real challenges which requires some real skills and demands some real self-awareness.

It’s a real job and not one that resides solely in some imaginative place in which someone sits on a throne where decisions are untouchable and things get done with a word – a presidency may be the world’s most difficult job.

Given what I sense was his perception of the job, its responsibilities and its ‘power’ I can only imagine the bitterness he must feel confronted by the stark truth that in the ‘real job’ <not the one he imagined> he cannot simply do what he wants to do and not everyone respects him <if not admires him> simply because he won ‘the crown.’

Sad.

But lost among all of this “Trump all the time” coverage are the people who voted for him. As he called them “the forgotten American.”

You know what? I actually agree with him with regard to a lot of these people. Lots of people and their legitimate grievances were forgotten as we obsessed over a variety of well intended causes.

They have a cause too … not just survival but economic opportunity and an opportunity to contribute as Americans should contribute.

And these people will pay the price not because as a mediocre president Trump ignores them <as many presidents have in the past> but because he raised their hopes and he is so mediocrely competent he cannot meet even the lowest hope.

Oh. That is not just mediocre … that is an asshat.

He is a mediocre man whose most immediate concern at the point of any decision is the Trump brand <which, at its core, is built around an image of ‘winning’>.

Oh, yeah, that win thing.

I cannot explain exactly what my feeling was when I read that in the middle of a discussion with reporters <on day 98> about Chinese President Xi Jinping Donald J Trump stopped and handed out copies, to each reporter in the room, of what he said were the latest figures from the 2016 electoral map.

“Here, you can take that, that’s the final map of the numbers,” the Republican president said from his desk in the Oval Office, handing out maps of the United States with areas he won marked in red.

“It’s pretty good, right? The red is obviously us.”

Oh. Now I know how to explain that feeling – mediocrity.

A mediocre man seeking to make everyone feel he is not mediocre.

A mediocre leader seeking to find ways to suggest he does not do mediocre things.

Sigh.

On occasion we get glimpses of what I would call, if I were generous, … encouraging signs of reality buried in the bluster. Signs that he knows how difficult the job is <which sucks compared to his incoming beliefs> and that he is woefully unprepared for it all.

And when I am generous I start to think he could get better at it.

I hope so.

Oh.

Who am I kidding? He is a 70 year old, bombastic, thin skinned, desperate for approval, narcissistic, mediocre asshat. He is not going to change. We may see a glimmer of ‘good shit’ on occasion but I can almost say with 90% confidence level he will remain who he is … a profoundly mediocre person.

In the end … his desire to create entertainment and the constant image/perception of ‘doing something’ only creates more uncertainty & angst than it does real solutions & progress.

Beyond the fact he doesn’t act the way we should expect a leader of a business to act <let alone a president or a global leader> he verbally and behaviorally:

treats laws on nepotism and conflicts of interests as though they don’t exist

lies so habitually that we now hesitate to trust anything he says

is constantly amazed that the job is as difficult as it is, the world is as complicated as it is and that maybe the people who had been doing things in the past just were not as stupid as he thought they were

All of which provides constant evidence, to us, that so far is he is an utterly incompetent President.

Yeah.

Sorry to tell everyone but underlying all the glimmers of hope resides the one underlying truth of the moment … he is a bullshit artist and a profoundly mediocre person and that is what we should expect from day 101 on.

As one article summarized it perfectly — Trump is simply a profoundly mediocre person tragically unfit for the presidency.

He was on day 1. He was on day 100. He is on day 101. And he will be on every foreseeable day from this day on. A mediocre person who only sees an extraordinary person when he looks in the mirror.

“You’re entitled to your own opinion, but you’re not entitled to your own facts.”

—-

Daniel Moynihan

=====================

Opinions.

We all have one … just like an asshole.

I say that because having an opinion, more likely than not, will make you an asshole.

Trust me.

I have lots of opinions. And lots of people think I am an asshole.

That said.

While we tend to take this whole topic of ‘opinion giving’ and opinion … and wad it up into some smelly misshapen spitball of nastiness … the truth is that not all opinions are created equal. The truth is that opinions come in a wide variety spanning from complete and utter made up bullshit to solidly grounded fact based thinking.

To be clear … this means that I am taking the distinction of opinions beyond the absurdity we seem to be currently facing that, simplistically, facts are very much like opinions. It is absurd because … well … facts and opinions are as different as a bird that an fly and a flightless bird.

Opinions are discard-able … what I own one day can be discarded for another … on another day. Facts are … well … facts cannot be discarded and, yet, in today’s world we seem to treat facts exactly the same way.

This not only implies facts don’t matter but, correspondingly, truth is negotiable <if mattering at all>.

Opinions, facts, whatever … it doesn’t matter because we seem to be relatively indifferent to whether something is grounded in fact based evidence or even reality. Now … there are certainly some cues to the more bullshit opinions … one well-used cue is:

“there is no smoke without fire”

Yeah, but half the time the ‘fire’ is simply that someone made some shit up. It’s a really stupid proverb, used as an excuse to desperately cling to unjustified beliefs & opinions. Facts are more difficult to translate into “cues” mostly because simply calling something a fact does not actually make it a fact.

==========

“When you are studying any matter or considering any philosophy ask yourself only what are the facts and what is the truth that the facts bear out.

Never let yourself be diverted either by what you wish to believe or by what you think would have beneficent social effects if it were believed but look only and solely at what are the facts.“

Bertrand Russell 1959

==============

Suffice it to say … opinions swing maddeningly back and forth between emphasizing ‘ a focus group of one’ to magnify some theoretical scale which, when used cleverly, can be leveraged to undermine the fabric of some truth and a well-articulated grounded-in-fact view.

This swinging wide range of opinions promotes a greater sense of questioning the expertise of anyone who might calmly assess the wide range of opinions and attempt to weigh them properly.

This means both opinion givers and opinions assessors are diminished <and all that remains is an opinion — false or true>.

Whew.

I know I write things out in as many thoughtful pieces as I can on enlightened conflict just so I can, personally, skew my thinking away from simple rants and toward some enlightened opinion <scattered with real facts>.

To me … a good opinion is due some dignity and integrity. Those who disagree tend to be the ones who spew forth intolerance, conspiracy theories and wild claims of ‘this is unequivocal truth’ <remember … beware those who claim truth>.

No doubt there are many aesthetic pleasures to opinions. I certainly enjoy them.

And I do think it is incredibly important for people to tell you what they are thinking, what side they are on and why … and even some recognition of perceived bias. That creates a well formed opinion from which others, assuming they have a somewhat open mind, can think & assess.

And therein lies the rub.

Today’s opinion environment is not particularly conducive to ‘open mind.’

It is almost like we have embraced what Milton suggested … what is so attractive to human beings is Satan’s byword – ‘Evil be Thou my good.’

I believe to untangle the evilness seeping within the world of opinions is to begin recognizing that while all opinion givers may be created equal not all opinions are created equal. The opinion world is almost demanding an “honest and intellectual combat.”

I didn’t make up that phrase … in fact … if you go read The National Review magazine mission and convictions you will not only find a well-crafted conservative manifesto but this:

D. The largest cultural menace in America is the conformity of the intellectual cliques which, in education as well as the arts, are out to impose upon the nation their modish fads and fallacies, and have nearly succeeded in doing so. In this cultural issue, we are, without reservations, on the side of excellence (rather than “newness”) and of honest intellectual combat (rather than conformity).

Maybe we should all suppose that someone is trying to impose upon us ‘their modish fads & fallacies” and in doing so consciously decide, if we elect to be an opinion giver, to stand on the side of excellence and of honest intellectual combat.

Maybe we should all suppose that opinion is really the lowest form of human knowledge in that it requires no accountability, no understanding.

Maybe we should all suppose that while opinions are important … not all opinions are created equal.

“The person who pretends to not see the truth is committing something much worse than a mortal sin, which can only ruin one’s soul – but instead committing us all to lifetimes of pain.

The truth is not just something we bring to light to amuse ourselves; the truth is the axis munid, the dead center of the earth.

When it’s out of place nothing is right; everyone is in the wrong place; no light can penetrate. Happiness evades us and we spread pain and misery wherever we go.

Each person, above all others, has an obligation to recognize the truth and stand by it.”

—–

Jacque Silette

=================

Well.

I personally am not losing sleep over the incessant headlines about “historically low trust scores for news media” and how the media is being attacked by everyone <although mostly by people who do not really want to hear the truths of what journalists are saying>.

You don’t get into journalism and not have a thick skin.

In addition … when you are being attacked by a shitload of people who do not appear to want to see the truth … well … journalism gets paid to open our eyes to things.

The news industry will hunker down and do what they do best when pushed into a corner … report shit that we should, and need to, hear & read.

That said.

I do lose some sleep over Fake News and with that … I will share an unpopular thought and one that should be stated more often.

I have said it before and I will say it again … at the core of any viable journalist <not a ‘fake journalist’ … which is some amateur like me or some blogger or someone with a smartphone videoing what is happening> is a healthy respect for truth.

Yeah.

Truth.

They may have some skewed ideological belief filter but truth is truth and facts are facts and every journalist worth a shit knows that their livelihood depends on truth & facts.

To suggest that “mainstream news” is all liberal … or dishonest … is just lazy rhetoric from lazy thinkers.

Now.

That said.

Journalism appears to be caught in the middle of a multi rope tug of war … think of it almost like a cat’s cradle tug of war.

Distraction from amateur, professional and made up news options. This is the easiest to spot and most likely the easiest for real news reporters & journalists to manage because it is out in the open and blatantly amateurish and mostly non-original content … Facebook and Twitter as well as online-only outlets such as Breitbart and BuzzFeed. Many of these outlets simply distract us from real journalism and the viable journalists need to help us discern fact from fiction and shiny objects versus objects of substance.

Easy to spot … easy to battle … but still a tug of war.

And then there is fake news. Don’t overthink this idea … fake is fake. It I made up. It is not made up of a distorted view of reality … it is simply a completely new reality – an alternative universe. The easiest example for me on this is “Hillary’s doctor hiding serious illness” <with highly edited video of some crap to show as proof>.

That is fake. That is made up.

And then there is the tug of war between opinion based newsand … well … news news. This is not fake news, per se, but rather the blurring between what is ‘infotainment’ <opinion based> and a straight up delivery of facts seen without some ideological or personal view filter.

That said. Journalism cannot ignore the fact that ‘infotainment’ has power. A recent PewResearch report shows that the power of television is … well … powerful in this segment of news/journalism.

In a paper titled “Bias in Cable News: Persuasion and Polarization” <Gregory J. Martin/Ali Yurukoglu> concluded that support from Fox News was capable of erasing as much as a 12-point lead by a Democratic candidate in an election.

In fact researchers have used the term “Fox News Effect” to describe the significant bump the network was capable of granting favored Republican candidates.

Pew studies show that 40% of Trump voters got their news from only/primarily FoxNews. In a distant second place for supporters of the president was CNN (8%), followed by Facebook (7%). Next was NBC (6%) and local news (5%), followed by much smaller segmentations.

That said. While powerful in driving attitudes the challenge for journalists in this example is that some of the “news” absorbed by viewers is actually “opinion” ,or , at best, infotainment depending on when they were watching.

And then there is distorted news.

This is actually an entire channel of quasi-information providers strewn throughout the internet spewing out distortions of reality. They look familiar when you interface with them but they interpret the same information that mainstream channels get in a completely different way – kind of creating an alternative universe that these ‘facts’ can actually exist.

It’s almost like they have taken the facts, moved them out of their home and placed them in some insane asylum.

They are rarely offering true fake news but instead paint the information in hues of innuendo and flawed logic conclusions.

What’s worse is that they call themselves ‘reality news.’

Instead … it is really like some bonehead, like me, who is an untrained journalist curating some information and spinning some mumbo jumbo you would hear in a drunken conversation at a bar.

However … because it is raw & unfiltered it comes across as ‘real’ albeit the information itself is actually not real.

The way the message is delivered creates the impression the message is … well … as good as what you get from professionals. It is not.

And then there is the cocooning of information gathering — I only get my news & information from places which <a> say what I already believe and <b> cater to other people who think like I do.

In this tug of war journalists who have valid things to say need to figure out how to share information with people who are receiving some valid information from journalists dedicated to that group.

I could argue that this is not news job but rather we need to encourage more people to be more curious … but that is a whole different challenge. Regardless. Journalists need to address cocooning.

Lastly.

The most demanding tug of war.

The sheer amount of people who just do not absorb any news.

None.

They neither read the news nor watch the news.

For any variety of reasons, some quite valid <I am too busy> and some not so

………. should journalists just shut up ??? ………

valid <they should just shut up>, there is a large swath of people who just do not watch, read or hear news — directly.

Therefore the news these people absorb is second hand or figuratively shared.

I will address later how journalism has to address this.

That is the multi dimensional tug of war real journalism is in at the moment.

Now.

While I just clarified the nuanced segmentation of the ‘challenges to effective journalism’ everyone should be clear that in the mish mash of everyday Life … it will only boil down to a battle of truth versus non-truth <lies> and facts versus made up shit.

In addition … I could suggest that the greatest divide that journalism faces right now is between those who seek news and those who do not seek news.

That said.

Journalists do NOT peddle fake news. Their battle is over real news and how it is delivered.

They do not offer fake news. They may misrepresent information & news … and they may offer some bad reporting and they may skew news <and they also have opinion shows which are … well … opinion shows and not news shows> but they do not offer fake news.

Fake news is made up.

Non existent truth.

Some bloke or gal sitting in front of some computer somewhere just deciding to tell a story under the guise of news.

Anyway.

In the end journalists have a couple of very specific challenges:

What I believe economists call “search value.”

People actually have to want to hear the news before they will actually hear it.

Sounds basic but as I noted earlier … there is a fairly significant segment of people who just do not pay attention to any news. That’s why I used the term ‘search value’ which is the measure of value associated with the work invested to attain it – i.e., I have to believe there is some value before I enter into the search.

Economists typically define value of information in the context of an optimal choice problem. A consumer is making a choice to maximize expected utility or minimize expected cost. Therefore, the value of information is the increment in expected utility resulting from the improved choice made possible by better information.

All that high falutin’ economist speak aside … journalism has to better build perceived value in what they offer and not assume people place a high enough value on it.

It is not about being neutral.

Journalists need to not only get a grip on who and what they are … but they also need to remind us, the everyday schmuck as it were, that objective journalism is not ‘neutral’ journalism … it is always about truth.

Opinions can certainly be neutral or skewed. Fake is news can be … well … it is just fake. And infotainment can be entertainingly skewed. But journalism should be always focused on truth & facts.

====================

It was easy to lose sight of the fact that objectivity, in the phrase of historian Thomas Haskell, is not neutrality. In the 1930s and 1940s, the poet and playwright Archibald MacLeish was one of many who saw journalistic objectivity bleeding into a potentially misleading neutralism. “It is current-day fancy to consider a journalist objective if he hands out slaps and compliments with evenhanded impartiality on both sides of the question,” MacLeish said. “Such an idea is, of course, infantile. Objectivity consists in keeping your eye on the object [and] describing the object as it is.”

—-

David Greenberg

===================

There is a misnomer with regard to ‘fair & balanced.’

Just as there is a misunderstanding between reporting news and journalism.

Just as there is a blurring between journalism and opinion shows.

And there is clearly a misguided notion with regard to ‘neutral.’

Journalism is all about, and only about, keeping your eye on the topic and describing the topic as it is. Journalists need to not only remind themselves of that but remind us of that.

Anyway.

I do believe real news and real journalism will win in the end because people demand truth and demand information which can help guide their own lives.

That said.

Journalism has an Achilles heel. And it is not fake news, distorted news or even lies.

It is each other.

They are screwed if they do not, as an industry, seek to discern news & journalism from infotainment & opinions. It is one of the few times where it would behoove all news deliverers to agree on some guidelines with regard to how they framed the information they provided.

This may sound counter to … well … all of them currently competing in a competitive eyeball environment. Yet. I would suggest to them that if they re-calibrate the industry working together they can go back to kicking the shit out of each other afterwards.

In the end.

Here is what journalism hopes for … the arc of truth.

You cannot out run truthful journalism … the truth always catches up with you.

And in doing that … therein lies the undoing of this absurd mess of ‘dishonest media.’

The moment that someone cannot consistently blame the media is the moment that people will tilt over to the other side and realize the media is not the problem and that truth & facts really do exist.

“When a fact begins to resemble whatever you feel is true, it becomes very difficult for anyone to tell the difference between facts that are true and “facts” that are not.”

—-

Katharine Viner

==============

“Alternative facts aren’t facts, they are falsehoods.”

Chuck Todd

===========

“Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?”

Groucho Marx

================

“Perception is a dynamic conflict between the attempts of an outer world to impose an actuality on us and our efforts to transform this actuality into a self-centered perspective.

Perception is a confrontation between an inward-directed vector of external reality compelling awareness and an outward-directed vector of physiological, cultural, and psychological transformation.

Where these vectors clash, where they balance each other, is what we perceive. This in sum is my view of perception.”

—–

Source: Understanding Conflict and War – Volume 1: The Dynamic Psychological Field

==========

So.

I have had this piece in my draft folder for months but I pulled it out because yesterday I heard for the first time “alternative facts.”

Yeah.

Not ‘non-truisms’ but real actual ‘alternative facts’.

This is a bastardized version of the false branding concept of “perception is reality.’

My belief is that at some point a long long time ago Trump read the back of some book about branding <because he has never read a book> that said “perception is reality” and he was off to the races creating a hollow universe of ‘perceptions’ in which he could skate along the superficial surface toward riches & fame.

Today, Trump and his merry band of liars, are now taking the perception business to a whole new level of absurdity.

Let us be very clear on some basic Truths:

Alternative facts live only in an alternative universe.

Perception is not reality.

As someone who has dabbled in marketing professionally “perception is reality” truly galls me.

It is an ugly lie.

And it is even uglier because in an untrained, inexperienced mind … or a misguided lack of moral individual … it can be used to defraud people – unintentionally or intentionally.

Perception is perception.

Reality is reality.

And perception is reality only, and ONLYif you permit it to be so.

Here is a fact.

Perceptions, by definition, are hollow things unless they are truly a reflection of reality.

And how can you know if this is true? If you puncture perception it deflates to whatever reality is. That is a ‘full honest perception.’

Let me be clear <because any real business person who has worked on any consumer brand in the world understands this>.

When you float on the superficial surface of a “perception based Life” you can only get away with it until people get interested enough to actually interact.

Because interaction is when the piper gets paid. As one famous advertising person said “nothing kills a bad product faster than good advertising.”

Look.

I am not suggesting perceptions, and managing them, is not a viable marketing objective nor am I suggesting that perceptions aren’t important. What I am saying, not suggesting, is that you learn very quickly in the business world that perceptions MUST align with reality or you are screwed. Reality must deliver upon perceptions offered & promised.

For example.

Trump can tell me he is intellectual, smart and knows the best words but every time his reality, his actions, deliver hollow simplicity, idiot thin-skinned responses and odd word salad verbiage I start questioning the perceptions he is asking us to believe.

The only people I have ever seen try and exist in a ‘perception is reality’ universe have been marketing hacks <who didn’t know any better> and con men <who knew better but wanted to make money and run>.

Perception is not reality and trying to create a universe based on perceptions is a hollow world.

Unfortunately in the universe we live in the new American president, on day one … to and … well … beyond for the foreseeable future I imagine … will constantly be trying to convince us reality is not reality, perceptions are what he and his merry band of liars say are truth, alternative facts exist and there is some alternative universe that he, and they, can only see.

We seem to be entering a new era in which truth is what Trump and his administration wants it to be.

Trump was a historically dishonest presidential candidate and his merry band of surrogates <liars> have displayed a persistent commitment to lying – needless lying or necessary lying.

Trump is a man who creates his own reality and lives in it … and he and his surrogates are asking us to live in it. Okay … not ‘ask’ … he is demanding it.

As his inauguration speech suggests … you will believe in his reality and will live in it … and therefore you will be demanded, not asked, to follow his lead within it.

You & I, America … and the rest of the world will have to decide whether it will accept this alternative universe or convince him his reality is actually a hollow universe of perversely wrong perceptions.

There are a number of risks at hand.

One is basic society construct – reality is no longer fact based but ‘feeling’ based.

The other is that Trump anchors this alternative universe based solely on some warped perceptions and therefore those who elect to follow will follow the pied piper <allegiance to him above all> and not to any ideology, values or principles <not even the US Constitution … because he becomes the sole arbiter of what the Constitution “means to say to us”>.

Trump is not a normal phenomenon and his alternative universe of false perceptions and alternative facts should not be normalized by something as simplistic a “politicians have always lied” and “we can never trust the media.”

Politics has always had a tenuous relationship with truth but even in that environment there are limits.

As Jonathan Last wrote in the conservative paper The Weekly Standard … “you can obfuscate, you can misrepresent, you can shade the truth to a ridiculous degree, or play dumb and pretend not to know things you absolutely do know. But you can’t peddle affirmative, provable falsehoods.”

Here is the surprising truth to add.

Journalism has always had a good relationship with truth but even in that environment there have been missteps which create a false narrative that journalism, as a whole, is dishonest. The majority of journalists are not dishonest, every viable publication in existence has a standard of honesty & proof and while they may tend to a more liberal skewed perspective … truth is truth and facts are facts and they treat both with reverence <because their existence relies on that>.

Anyway.

This ‘perception is not reality’ truth is going to be challenged like it has never been challenged before.

I will give you the easiest way to puncture a reality/perception gap. Get someone to envision the repercussion of acting, or not acting, upon the perception. What does the day after look like, feel like and … well … be like.

This helps meet the challenge created by false leaders who exaggerate crises or create them with the intent to subvert, and pervert, the constitution, the judiciary process and the system itself.

This helps meet the challenge created by false leaders who offer simple solutions for complex problems.

===

“The simpler past seems more attractive than today’s complex reality, and so people vote [thanks to] inchoate frustrations. They choose simplicity and locality over complexity; identity over internationalism. Politicians promote themselves by giving voice to this. Hence, in addition to Brexit, we have calls for Scottish independence, Catalan independence, and so forth.”

—

Tainter

====

And maybe that is where perception gains traction in a complex world. If complexity doesn’t show simple benefits, or maybe the real benefits are difficult to align in a cause & effect way, perception starts beating reality.

Well.

It will until reality catches up to the false promises & false simple solutions offered by perceptions.

The alternative universe can only last as long as … well … the alternative universe can stave off the real universe.

Just as alternative facts can only last as long as the real facts can get their shit together and get in the game.

I would note that Trump’s alternative universe isn’t so much about his lying <although that is truly the shiny object we focus on> but rather he’s just wrong in a simplistically naive way about almost everything <and even on the things he has a valid point on and I could construe as ‘right’ he unnecessarily cloaks it in ambiguity & hyperbole so that even his right is wrong>.

He rambles aimlessly about anything that happens to pop into his brain and is convenient for him to say at the time. He is not typically deliberate about his lying he is simply authentically living in his own alternative universe and explaining that universe to us.

The universe itself may be one bigly lie but his explanations are truth about the universe.

Trump is a rambling, bombastic narcissist. He’s never pretended to be anything else. What you see is what you get. His integrity resides solely on authentically communicating the big Lie <although … in his mind … in his universe … it is the big Truth>.

Oddly this seems to mean, at least to the everyday schmuck like me, that an authentic liar has more integrity than a calculated communicator.

He is genuine in his belief of this alternative universe.

His perception is actually his reality <just ponder that scary thought for a moment>.

Ok.

That is bizarre.

Fucking bizarre.

Trump and his merry band of liars use a variety of truth-blurring techniques <i call it “chaff”>.

Their objective appears to not only be to control by creating doubts about what is real and what isn’t, but also to create an alternative universe in which whatever he does actually looks like it makes sense.

To quote President Trump himself … Bad! Sad!

There is a much bigger lesson here for everyone beyond whether our new president is capable of telling the truth or whether he, and his followers, even care and accept alternative truths as reality … perceptions are NOT reality.

Perceptions should always be held accountable.

People should be always be held accountable for the perceptions they create and offer.

In the end I come back to the beginning.

Here is what I think as an everyday person.

Envision the day after your perception is faced by the harsh truth of reality.

Will you be scared?

Will you be excited?

Will you be happy, sad, or somewhere in between?

Good on you if you come out of these questions excited, happy and looking forward to the reality which perceptions suggested it would be.

Just make sure you treat what you perceive with care.

Here is what I think as a business & marketing person.

The gap between perception and reality is the “death trap.”

====

‘In the day we sweat it out on the streets of a runaway American dream …’ It’s a ‘death trap,’ a ‘suicide rap.’

If expectations are not met in reality … people swing back angrily upon the ‘perception creators.’

Creating false perceptions is a suicide rap.

Creating false perceptions is a death trap.

Many of us business folk have the scars to prove this.

Treat what you ‘build’ as perceptions with care.

Perceptions are simply that … perceptions.

Facts are facts.

Reality is truth.

============ postscript ============

In the piece above I said “authentically living in his own alternative universe and explaining that universe to us” and today he once again states “I would have won the popular vote if it had not been for the 3 to 5 million illegal votes.” Just another example of an alternative universe being authentically explained to us <and most of us wondering what universe he lives in>.

If I got paid by the word with regard to everything I have received about

Trump and everything I have written in response about the ongoing Trump shit show <almost 18000 words in one week on the asshat himself> … well … suffice it to say I would most likely be lounging outside the Deux Magots with a funny looking beret on my head sipping on some French espresso living the large life.

That said.

I admit

When I share my thoughts I am not quite sure if my Trump frame of reference is “amateur trying to do a professional’s job” or sheer incompetence or dangerous naiveté <simplistic thinking applied to a complex issue> or lack of understanding of how to lead, purposeful ignorance or he is just a purposefully ignorant dumbass … regardless … all of it always through the filter that “strength is only conveyed through an obvious façade of unwavering thin skinned bombastic narcissism”.

In addition … I never really know if I am assessing lies or bullshit.

To lie assumes a presumption the person actually knows the truth <and I often seriously doubt he knows what the hell he is talking about> while bullshit, by contrast, does not know or care whether what s/he says is true or false. The liar possesses knowledge of the truth, while the bullshitter ignores it entirely.

What I do know <and I’m concerned> is that the other morning on tv I saw a panel of journalists/news anchors simply laugh out loud over a preposterous trump tweet lie … and move on. He has normalized lying to such an extent they don’t even bother to respond or comment … just snicker at the absurdity of it all.

And all the while, as they snicker and dismiss, it is only The Donald who can tell the truth while everyone else is automatically lying.

Black is white.

Up is down.

In is out.

In this alternative world Trump creates an alternate truth … and somehow we are actually letting it become real.

This cannot be normalized nor can it be deemed accepted. The Trump shit show has to be publicly reviewed as constant bullshit.

Regardless.

The people who ask me about Trump bring up valid points and express valid thoughts. Love Trump or hate Trump he has made people talk about what matters.

Here is a random sampling of thoughts shared with me … and thoughts I have shared in return:

======

Americans don’t think America is great.

The gap between rich and poor has grown wider.

As have black and white relations.

Hollywood thinks it’s great, because they’re in the stratosphere of pay.

Someone makes $2.5 million a month. A month!

Good for him. Bad for middle class who can’t relate.

Most people don’t like the Clintons or the Bush’s. They’re just slimy people.

Trumps vision is this: Every deal must be great for America. Not even. Better. That’s winning.

We’ve been losing to the Chinese for years. Losing manufacturing jobs, losing companies to Mexico, etc. The fact that he wants those companies going to 3rd world companies to pay a tariff on their products coming back in to America, is genius. A fair penalty for not giving Americans here a job.

What’s nice about Tweets over Speeches is they’re his own words. Not rehearsed scripts written by others. It’s real. Raw. Right or wrong. It’s honest.

=====

The thoughts are valid … if slightly misguided. But I answer every email I get and try and address each thought one by one.

Why?

The discussion is all that matters. The moment we stop talking with each other and debating with each other is the moment we stop listening and … well … we stop. Period.

And that is not good.

Trump’s message, dumbed down for America, is simple:

Make America great again.

*** uhm. This only works if enough people believe America is in enough of a shithole that it isn’t great now.

And he is a master at creating shithole perceptions:

-Create more U.S. jobs <by implying unemployment is horrible levels … and it is not>

-Make friends again with Israel & Russia <uhm … we are supportive of Israel with unwavering security support … oh … implying we should be friends with Russia … who by the way needs us … and we do not need them>

-Why? Because the enemy of my enemy (ISIS) is my friend <oh … if it were only that simple … it is easier to just say islam is bad>. Oh … also … by implying ISIS is an actual existential danger to us AND by implying it is a bigger issue than it is <that’s called ‘selling through fear’>.

-Stop illegal immigration (somehow-most likely a fence and more border patrol) <if it were actually a big problem … I would agree … he implies it is a big problem>

-Eliminate the bad parts of ObamaCare. Most of which, “only works, if you don’t.” <which, oddly, Clinton & Obama wanted to do and Republicans did not>

*** I would note on Obamacare … imagine where we would be if everyone had done what Kasich had done on day one … rather than fight it … he moved forward to see how it could benefit his people. If it had been embraced on day one it would be fine and have less fixes needed.

Other issues discussed?

Tariffs.

They weren’t good then and they are not good now.

All they do is raise the costs to us, the working people, as the company passes them along back to us. His tariff only on US company importing back in to US is almost as non-genius as his “tariffs on China.”

Its simplistic drivel that suggests you can penalize companies for competing in a free market.

The issue isn’t cheap labor … it is varying cost of living nation to nation. In a global economy unless everyone has the same cost of living <and standard of living> there will always be other places cheaper to create the shit you want to create. Tariffs only exacerbate the issue.

90% of jobs outside of USA will never come back. We need to get over that. Those jobs are cheaper through automation in US if we demand they bring them back.

Tariffs kill many small businesses who can only compete with cheaper goods outside of USA.

You cannot bring back jobs. And, practically, he doesn’t really care about the overseas jobs <and he shouldn’t> … everything he is talking about is about bringing back money. Which he is gonna need with his budget plan <that part is actually ok>.

Authentic.

Sigh.

What a sad state of affairs if we are using ‘like Trump because he is authentic.’

Authenticity has never hit such a low.

Especially if it is combined with ‘raw & honest.’ I will give him raw … but honest? He is not just a liar … he creates an alternative universe. And, please, please don’t say ‘all politicians lie.’ The majority use selective truths and facts. At least their ‘lies’ are mostly a distortion of the entire story. Trump authentically creates an entirely new story <lie>. He is singlehandedly destroying the concept of authentic.

Twitter & tweeting.

…. by the way, saying “he should make speeches not tweets,” is like me saying, “we should do television ads not social media!” The world has changed. Forever.

*** wrong. Leader’s words matter. And how and when you use words matter. If he tweeted his vision, if he tweeted words that led ?? sure. Maybe. But he has divided so much thru his rhetoric he needs, as a leader, to establish a construct for what he plans. His tweets appeal to his rabid base who say ‘do whatever you want.”

But most people want a leader to lead.

He needs more than 140 characters to explain. And, no, the world has not changed forever in this case. Twitter is a supplemental communication tool. It does not live in a vacuum. It cannot. It supplements, or compliments, events and stories and content. He needs to offer content.

China.

Well. They have a significantly lower cost of living and standard of living for their workforce. Their government subsidizes their private businesses. They are US economy from maybe 100 years ago. TPP was our best way of curbing China … anything you may think is bad tradewise with China now … will get worse without TPP.

Unless we demand everyone to stop wanting to own a home and to need $70,000 a year to live … competing with China will always be difficult <and the same with any of the developing countries>.

The other thing people seem to forget is … if you are a global company the closer you can put your manufacturing to the sale … the lower the distribution costs.

I am not suggesting trade deals do not always need to be tweaked <not trashed or even renegotiated>. Market dynamics demand shifts in deals to maintain balance. But the overall goal should always be win win. Especially for USA. Because we have the largest economy … and we have the largest buying capability … we win if the tide rises higher.

Great.

The majority of people actually do think America is great <numbers show that>. And even middle class America does <albeit if you look at just the Republican numbers they think we are in a complete shithole>.

What many people have been convinced is that someone has it better than they do … and they get grumpy about that.

Heck. We barrage people with so much negative crap even if they are happy they have been convinced they should be unhappy.

This may be the greatest example of the gap between perception and reality I have seen in my lifetime.

Small groups of people are desperately in worse shape, some people are in good shape but have not improved, most people are doing fine but hearing all the talk about the top 1% and feel entitled to some of what they got. That is reality. we have a higher standard of living than any country of any size in world. We live longer, are, other than fat, in good health, best and largest economy in the world, low unemployment, low overall violence <with isolated pockets which people distort to a larger view>.

That is Trump’s most egregious flaw. He distorts “the one” into “the many.” He implies an isolated situation is indicative of the greater whole. And he does it with such hyperbole <and lies> even if most people do not believe it … it elevates whatever perception you may already have a little higher <therefore … he drags more people closer to believing we are in a shithole … not great>.

Winning & trade deals.

Oh. If it were only as simple as you suggest. Trade deals are not just trade deals … they encompass foreign policy as well as alliance issues. Regardless. Even if they were only trade … in a global world a ‘deal’ wins when it is balanced … you call it ‘even’ … one side does not win. If you do try and negotiate something like that you create imbalance in the relationship <which creates anger & frustration> and creates the kind of ‘why America is hated’ feeling which seeps into the population which … well … creates terrorists.

We seek mutually beneficial deals in which American companies benefit. The issue isn’t trade deals … it is deciding what we want the American economy to be and how we can insure the American worker benefits. Companies, in general, do not care about the labor force unless they need them. It is, frankly, not in their interest to care. Their interest is to be competitive in the marketplace and make money.

============

My own guess is that Theresa, having sussed in advance that her interlocutor is a blithering saddo, will put him at his ease with an extravagant compliment about his non-existent personal magnetism. “That thing on your head is divine,” she will be already saying during the soup course. “So elegant, yet so masculine.

How do you keep it in place? Surely only the strongest industrial adhesive can contain something so powerfully virile?”

By that time, she will be breathing in his ear and he eating out of her hand. Cue violins.

—-

Clive James

======

So as an Independent who loathes politicians and lawyers in general, I, like so many others are willing to give him enough rope to hang himself. Which, he may do. But my goodness, give it a chance. Because as even Obama says; “We want good things to happen. Because if he fails, we fail.”

*** I have never suggested I want him to fail. All I have ever done is demand he lead. I don’t want to give him rope to fail because if he fails … we all hang.

I LOVE that he’s pissing off Republicans, Democrats, Bush’s, Clintons, and everything in the political establishment. So do a ton of Americans. No more politics as usual, and all these cozy-wink-wink jobs are going away. No wonder they’re all freaked out. I say, throw them out!

Well.

No one of any consequence is hysterical <although I would suggest if I saw any of my employees hysterical I wouldn’t laugh or shrug it off as silly … I would sit back and wonder what I had done to create it>.

They are freaking out not because it is affecting status quo … but rather because <a> he shows no sign of being a leader and <b> he shows little sign he knows what he is getting into to.

No one is pissed off. These are people who take their jobs seriously and have serious jobs to do.

They are all concerned he is not qualified and not doing anything to insure he can meet the bare minimum to fulfill his obligations as a president.

If I wanted to hire a change agent I could have hired him as a consultant. He got hired to be a president.

People absolutely fear what they do not know.

Ultimately, that is my point. A good leader abhors uncertainty in their organization. It creates dysfunction and inefficiencies.

It’s amazing to me how many people criticize him, before he’s even been in office one day. What happened to Liberals wanting everyone to have a fair chance to prove themselves?…

This has nothing to do with liberals. People I know say the republicans are mortified by his behavior and uncomfortable with his lack of leadership skills to date.

And that is why you shouldn’t be amazed. Being president isn’t about ‘getting a chance.’

This is a country and not a business. And it is certainly not a real estate business with no culture and just “Trump personality” as a guiding compass.

But even if I do view this as a business leader … he has done nothing to show leadership, explain his vision <except in tweets>, explain that he understands the depth & breadth of what is demanded of his position <diplomacy>, or even made an effort to explain to the significant majority of the country who did not vote for him <democrats + independents + nonvoters> how he plans on uniting everyone after he was so divisive in the campaign <and continues to use words that divide>.

He sees uncertainty as a plus. And maybe in his little world of real estate it is … but in the bigger world where his words drive company value up & down, his tweets create diplomacy issues and his silence permits everyone to guess what he will do … there has to be some undergirding of certainty to hold it all together.

Any business leader will tell you that. He looks like, and acts like, a rookie in a leadership position. He is making the type of leader mistakes we make in our first big promotion.

On top of that … I wrote about this days before the economic piece I wrote … he acts like a president now but acts like his actions have no repercussions until inauguration. He is the president elect and not a citizen sitting at the corner of the bar bitching about ‘those damn politicians.’

And if you think everyone else globally is sitting around waiting to see what he really is gonna do … well … you are nuts.

While I criticize him incessantly for his words and his lack of understanding that words matter. I criticize him mostly for his lack of leadership. He has never run a company with an organizational culture. He has only run a transactional company. He would not know how to run a real company if you … well … tried to teach him.

As I wrote in my piece … I would have him work for me and I would direct him to do things because he is transactional. He would be great at sales and duking shit out on a transaction by transaction basis. But I would never, ever, permit him to run an entire business organization. our only hope is, just as I wrote, the cabinet people can see beyond the simple transactions and weld together a new global economy without costing us too much with regard to our overall role in the world beyond simple economics.

I criticize him because he deserves criticism. He is not a thin skinned brat. He is not a tweeter in chief. He is responsible for 320 million people. He is responsible for a country that currently resides at the hub of the global wheel.

In addition I often find in this discussion we end up confusing two issues:

Accepting responsibility and Implementing responsibility.

I have no doubt this administration will implement some things that will be good <I am just not sure at what expense … as I have written several times>

But as any leader worth a shit will tell you … in order to most effectively implement, particularly change, you need to accept responsibility, earn the trust in the responsibility and ultimately align people in a direction. Then you will be judged fairly in the ‘first year in office.’ He is showing he has never run a real organization before.

In business terms … he just got promoted to a fragmented organization in which one department adores him. This is exactly what happens when a sales EVP gets promoted to CEO of a service driven organization. Sales is known for saying whatever they need to say to make the sale … and the rest of the organization gets stuck fixing it or making it work. A good leader in that position stands up and lays out his guiding principles, his vision for what he wants to do and asks <yes, ASKS> everyone to contribute and give it a chance. A good leader says “if we all move forward, point out what needs to be fixed as we move forward, we can do this.”

A good leader knows if you do not prime the pump attitudinally … accept the responsibility … you are destined for a dysfunctional bitchy organization.

He should give three speeches. Not taped. Not tweeted. Speeches.

Explain his campaign rhetoric.“I may not say the right thing every time but apply this filter with everything because my intent always remains “x” …” <note: albeit I tend to believe he has no idea what he is saying in some incomprehensible word salad>

Explain his vision. <and I really do not care if it is economic at the expense of other shit … just state it>.

Explain change management. Any leader worth a shit will warn people of what is coming. If he plans on doing a lot in 100 days … warn everyone. If he wants to set some expectations for year one. Tell everyone. Any good leader knows you purposefully set the ‘judge me by’ goalpost … because if you do not everyone will judge you differently.

In addition … if he does this he calms global parties who are now scrambling to do their own thing. He doesn’t just need a ‘year to judge’ internally, domestically, he needs to calm global partners now.

He can do all of his now and stop the ‘fear’ and divisiveness <but he has not chosen to do so>.

And he needs to do it NOW because Obama is so well respected by the majority of USA and the world … and he is acting so differently from Obama … he needs to show people the bridge. Any good leader knows, if you are significantly different from the leader you are replacing, you need to calm some employees … and manage the excitement of others.

I don’t ‘give’ a leader anything.

I expect a good leader to lead.

And maybe the worst? He doesn’t even seem to understand the repercussion of his style. He assumes he has been crowned and everyone will automatically respect & trust <despite the fact he had a crappy reputation running his own department in the business> and he is oblivious to how his words divide and not unite.

He may be an excellent transaction dealer. And I hope he is.

Because he absolutely sucks as a leader.

Anyway.

I will continue to try and watch all the news stations and read shit online when I can <usually when I am sitting on an exercise bike in the gym and can watch CNN, MSNBC & Fox at the same time> … but Fox is a little tough to swallow most of the time.

I think much of the conversation is all stupid.

I think conservatives laughing at liberals is stupid.

I think liberals laughing at conservatives is stupid.

It’s all stupid because we all want the same thing … some just like different tactics than others. And getting angry over tactics is … well … stupid.

But I think Trump is the stupidest because a good leader would have resolved all of this already … and he has done nothing.

And I am too tired of talking about how twitter is not a main communication tool <especially for a leader>, that Trump does not know how to lead, that his main go-to tactic is to appeal to people’s fears & doubts, and that I worry his personal opinions are more important than trying to appeal, and benefit, 320 million people.

But I will keep talking to whomever will listen about this until we make good progress and get what we should expect from our leaders.